Syntactic priming persists while the lexical boost decays : Evidence from written and spoken dialogue

By Robert J. Hartsuiker, S. Bernolet, Sofie Schoonbaert, Sara Speybroeck, D. Vanderelst. 2008

333 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Developmental and Educational Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/073b6cac5f4c35d409a6880301c8e879819e377d

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cognitive Neuroscience

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

Citations in the corpus

The logic of syntactic priming and acceptability judgments (2016, neutral): “…particularly robust finding is that various types of structural priming are considerably enhanced by repetition of the head of the local tree (the so-called lexical boost; e.g., Branigan, Pickering, and Cleland 2000; Cleland and Pickering 2003; Hartsuiker et al. 2008; Pickering and Branigan 1998).”
The development of shared syntax in second language learning* (2015, background): “But additionally, as suggested by Bock and Griffin (2000), Chang et al. (2006), and Hartsuiker et al. (2008), there is evidence supporting the account that there is an explicit memory component to priming in addition to a more abstract component.”
Alignment and task success in spoken dialogue (2014, background): “Verbatim, lexical repetition is known to increase the strength of priming (Pickering and Branigan, 1998; Gries, 2005; Hartsuiker et al., 2008).”
Rapid Expectation Adaptation during Syntactic Comprehension (2013, result): “Research on this question has found conflicting results, with some researchers finding long-lasting syntactic priming [28,91,93] and others rapidly decaying syntactic priming [90] (for recent attempts to reconcile discrepant findings see [94,95]).”
Structural priming: a critical review. (2008, background): “In accord with this, Hartsuiker et al.’s (2008) study manipulated whether prime and target verbs were repeated or not and found a lexical boost when prime and target sentences were adjacent but not when they were separated by two or six sentences.”
Structural Priming and Second Language Learning. (2012, background): “Recently, a combined account of the mechanisms responsible for structural priming has been proposed with multiple factors underlying structural priming (a so-called multifactorial account), including both residual activation in explicit memory and implicit-learning processes (Ferreira & Bock, 2006; ”
Implicit Learning and Syntactic Persistence: Surprisal and Cumulativity (2007, background): “ Hartsuiker et al., submitted ), longer-lived effects of previously processed structures, such as cumulativity and lack of decay in the absence of verb identity between prime and target, support implicit learning accounts.”
A meta-analysis of syntactic priming in language production (2016, background): “Hartsuiker et al. (2008) found something similar and argued that it reflects evidence for both a long-term implicit learning account of syntactic priming as well as a short-term lexical component.”
Cross-linguistic structural priming in multilinguals: further evidence for shared syntax (2016, methodology): “Hartsuiker et al. (2004), for example, showed that Spanish/English bilinguals described a picture more often with a passive sentence in English (“the church is hit by lightning”) when they were exposed to a passive sentence in Spanish immediately before (as opposed to an active sentence or a control”